Life from Space - Panspermia...

--- Bill Hamilton wrote:
Life from space - Panspermia.

I have been following developments in Astrobiology that indicate
an exciting new trend. This is becoming one of my favorite new sciences. The new trend indicates that life is not a closed system on planet earth. The seeds of life are awash on the cosmic shores of space and life here most likely came from life out there.

What does this mean for our view of the cosmos? I quote below...

"Pseudo-panspermia is the delivery of complex organic compounds from space, to give the prebiotic soup some starter ingredients. This notion has already become widely accepted.

Basic panspermia is the presence in space, or on bodies like comets or asteroids, of microbial life that can be safely delivered to planets and start life there. If the cells escape from a living planet on fragments after a meteor impact, the phenomenon is called litho-, ballistic-, impact- or meteoritic panspermia. Such trips are usually thought to be interplanetary.

Modern panspermia proposes comets as the delivery vehicles. Comets can protect cells from UV and cosmic radiation damage; and comets can drop cells high in the atmosphere to float gently down. If bacterial spores can be immortal, as it appears, comets could spread life throughout a galaxy.

So far we have been talking about only the origin of life on Earth or on any given planet. Strong panspermia is the extension of modern panspermia to deal with evolution as well. In strong panspermia, the genes for evolutionary advances are not written by copying mistakes and reshuffling within an original set of bacterial genes. Instead they are installed by gene transfer. If these genes are spread by infectious agents such as viruses, they can transform whole populations in a single generation. The importance of gene transfer in evolution has gradually become recognized within mainstream biology. For example, a study that appeared in Nature 5 in May 2000, reported:
?It is difficult to account for the ability of bacteria to exploit new environments by the accumulation of point mutations alone. In fact, none of the phenotypic traits that are typically used to distinguish the enteric bacteria Escherichia coli from its pathogenic sister species Salmonella enterica can be attributed to the point mutational evolution of genes common to both. Instead, there is growing evidence that lateral gene transfer has played an integral role in the evolution of bacterial genomes, and in the diversification and speciation of the enterics and other bacteria." Horizontal gene transfer also works in higher eukaryotes, where we used to hear that the germ line was protected from invasion. The very opposite may be the case. Recently scientists have observed that some transposable elements are preferentially expressed in germline cells and not somatic cells.

In the strong version of panspermia, Darwinian evolution can produce variation that results from one or two point mutations, and can, by natural selection, lead to adaptation, or microevolution. But this is not the same as macroevolutionary progress requiring whole new genes that differ from known predecessors by dozens to hundreds of essential nucleotides. In strong panspermia, those new genes must be supplied from elsewhere.

Until the emergence of panspermia, science believed that our whole planet was a biologically closed system. If so, the closed-system experiment is already well under way with proven, planet-wide results in favor of Darwinism. But the mere possibility of panspermia changes the situation entirely. One can no longer safely claim that the planet is a biologically closed system. Therefore, any instance of biological progress on Earth may result from the expression of genes acquired from elsewhere. In other words, the whole planet is subject to genetic contamination from space. If science ought to be sceptical of claims that have weak support, it should now be sceptical of the Darwinian account of evolutionar progress (this view does not support Creation Science either-BH).

In its strongest version, panspermia holds that intelligent life can only descend from prior intelligent life. Logically, therefore, intelligent life must have always existed, and what we have called ?evolutionary progress? would actually be the local development of pre-existing, highly evolved life. This theory is fully scientific; there is nothing supernatural about it. I am attempting to name it Cosmic Ancestry. It responds to the informed criticism that Darwinism does not account for evolutionary progress."

These new trends in Astrobiology strengthen the hypothesis that we will find life on other planets througout the Cosmos. The strongest version of panspermia indicates that we will also find intelligent life througout the Cosmos. Though not proven yet, it lends support to the ET hypothesis for UFO origins. It also lends some support to evolutionary interference by advanced ET races that have come to earth. It does not go so far as to lend support to the ET abduction human-hybrid scenario though we could consider the possibility. Any argument that DNA from an alien source could not be mixed with ours would need re-evaluation in the new open systems view of life on earth.

One Astrobiologist, Dr. Rhawn Joseph, has strong opinions and ideas in line with the new trend. he states... "The likelihood that life and its DNA emerged from an organic soup, or undersea thermal vent -at least on Earth- is the equivalent of discovering a computer on Jupiter and then arguing that it was randomly assembled in the Methane Sea.

The Origin of Life: If life were to appear on a desert island, we would assume it washed to shore, or fell from the sky. The Earth too, is an island, swirling in an ocean of space, and debris and living creatures, have been washing ashore since the creation.

Cosmic collisions are commonplace, not only between meteors and planets, but entire galaxies, and life has been repeatedly tossed into the abyss...only to land on other planets. The genetic seeds of life swarm throughout the cosmos, and these genetic "seeds," these living creatures, fell to Earth, encased in stellar debris which pounded the planet for 700 millions years after the creation.

And just as DNA contains the genetic instructions for the creation of an embryo, neonate, child, and adult, and just as modern day microbes contain


Comments are very welcome.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

As always.
Discussion please...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I always thought the theory that life was just forced into existence by millions of years of lightening and heat etc was ludicrous when that goes against the origin of life (it's like saying that mice come from hay because mice inside hay is so common). So that means that for now until we figure out this perplexing problem this theory is basically as good as any (except the previous).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Banshee,

I am pleasantly suprised with your choice of topics.

Basic panspermia is the presence in space, or on bodies like comets or asteroids, of microbial life that can be safely delivered to planets and start life there.

Panspermia that made it to Earth could also have made it to other planets in and outside our solar system. Europa is as good a candidate as any other object within our system. Although massive waves of radiation emitting from Jupiter bathe the small moon, there exists a mere thirty or so meters beneath the frozen surface, safe haven from the deadly radiation. A comet or asteroid, carrying our small friends, colliding with Europa could easily penetrate the ice to more than thirty meters.

One could therefore postulate that the same 'alpha cell' that brought life to Earth billions of years ago, lay dormant somewhere beneath the frozen surface of Europa. In other words, the original lifeform that began all life on Earth has been sitting in stasis for billions of years orbiting a planet right in our own back yard.

I wonder what implications that will bring?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If the cells escape from a living planet on fragments after a meteor impact, the phenomenon is called litho-, ballistic-, impact- or meteoritic panspermia. Such trips are usually thought to be interplanetary.

WE are the ALIENS! hehe Had to say that...

If the organism arrived from another planet, that would mean our interpretations regarding timelines are incorrect. Our estimate of when the primordial soup of life began are little more than estimates as to when organisms arrived here on Earth. Earth therefore is nothing more than a giant 'incubator.' Certainly a blow to the human ego.

But this organism had to have begun somewhere. If it came from another planet, what's to say it didn't arrive at that planet carried there on an asteroid from somewhere else, and so on? And what's to say that if life had been created off-world and then transported here, why couldn't it have been created here on Earth in the first place? Of course, one must take into account the age of the universe and how long the first life form appeared within it. There would have to be a finite amount of time required before any conditions existed to create life anywhere in the universe. That should be our starting point. Where in the universe was the first 'habitable zone?' If the organism arrived from elsewhere it would have needed to quickly adapt to our environment in order to survive. What would Darwin have thought about that?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Hey Banshee, what are your thoughts?

 

Evolution theory up in smoke...

It has become clear that any form of life cannot be created and
sustained under laboratory conditions. Many scientists have
theorized that life began with an electrical spark and a primordial
soup. The primordial soup, is thought by some to be the building
blocks of life, and henceforth nature. The evidence would strongly rule this out.

Speculation is that there is strong evidence that there had to be
some form of higher intelligence and/or a divine hand in all of
this. If this were not true, life would not exist on this planet, as
we know it today.

FACT: All past experiments that have tried to produce life by
duplicating those conditions have resulted in very primitive amino
acid chains but have failed to produce the desired results...viable
life forms that can exist outside of the laboratory. Life cannot be
produced in this manner and correct, then all future experiments will inevitably fail.

Out of all of the experiments that have been done with the primordial soup, not a single experiment has produced one
viable amino acid chain that would remotely suggest that life had
began as a direct result of this random act of nature.

There seems to be a high probability that our biosphere has been influenced by primitives of life-forms from non-Earth sources.

It was Urey at the University of Chicago that first suggested that life formed on Earth in a reducing atmosphere through exposure to ultraviolet and/or lightning.

Miller (a student of Urey at the U of Chicago) was the first to create amino acids through exposing the primordial atmosphere (reducing rather than oxydizing, ie Ammonia, Carbon Dioxide, water vapor) to anelectric spark. The experiment was the basis for his PhD. He obtained amino acids.

Biologically important chemicals have been found in meteorites.

This does not eliminate Urey's theory and it likely can be reasoned that we have a combined 'effort' so to speak. There is a high probability that our biosphere is not a closed system.

Even so, this does not eliminate the possibility that life could be created in a closed system. However, there is liklihood that panspermia helps accelerate the evolution of the creation process.

For now we have to leave the question of life creation as an open question. This means that for now we cannot eliminate the possibility that life forms have always existed in the Universe(s).

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[Q], because my English is not that good, certainly not if it comes to scientific talk, I've copied the most most part of it from someone else's words. Just to put it in shape, so to say.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If you want, we can go a little further with this. Guess Darwin's evolution theory goes up in smoke here.

And yes, you said it perfectly right...We Are The Aliens...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

[Q],

Not so after you recognize her version of Transpermia is based on the supposition that Cmdr. Aton, commanding his fleet of spaceships now returning from the Pleiades with Elvis and Jesus Christ, was the initiating party ultimately responsible for impregnating Earth's early homonid-like females with his own personal space seeds.

I must presume he had a very special thing for the early apes. And, thus the origin of the colloquiallism "monkey-business".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

[Q], because my English is not that good, certainly not if it comes to scientific talk, I've copied the most most part of it from someone else's words. Just to put it in shape, so to say.

That is no excuse. You are perfectly able to read and write English regardless of how poor you think it might be. You certainly have been able to get your point across on previous posts, so why not now? Are you not also a moderator? Do not the people of this forum place your status in high regard? You are one most others here tend to seek guidance and understanding. That is the role of a moderator/mentor. Your thoughts are considered valuable. To simply cut, paste and run are not attributes worthy of a forum representative such as yourself.

Here's my advice then, if you care to take it. Find yourself an on-line translator that allows you to copy and paste a response in YOUR first language. Translate the response into English, proof-read it as best you can OR use a spell/grammar checker, and post the response. Easy. That way you can portray your thoughts as if you were conversing with someone in your own language. You should also be able to copy/paste English responses into the translator and translate to your language. That should better help you to understand everyone else. What is your first language btw?

 

Just a few things to consider.

Earth's distance from the Sun varies up to about three per cent. The supposed habitable zone is quite a broad band.

Life exists in conditions people once thought could not possibly sustain life. Those undersea volcanic vents for example.

There's a reason why NASA is testing for certain chemicals on Mars. There's a reason why they are hoping to find life on Europa. There's a reason why they employ astrobiologists.

Space is chockas with organic molecules, more so in the visibly dense clouds. The only difference between organic molecules and cells is time. The only difference between cells and us is time. There are many experiments underway right now trying to mimic the conditions expected in those big clouds in space, experiments designed to see if they can develop cells in those conditions from the organic molecules known to be present.

Pansmperia was a joke to almost everyone only a few years ago. Now it is an accepted possibility. I would not be surprised if life CAN come from clouds in space, but also springs up on planets where those organic molecules are far more abundant.

 

Not so after you recognize her version of Transpermia is based on the supposition that Cmdr. Aton, commanding his fleet of spaceships now returning from the Pleiades with Elvis and Jesus Christ, was the initiating party ultimately responsible for impregnating Earth's early homonid-like females with his own personal space seeds.

Banshee! Is this true? Have you been yanking our chains all along? Expiring minds want to know.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://soulinvitation.com/thoth/

 

Dear [Q]...

My first language is Dutch, for your information. I understand the subject rather well, am not able to talk the scientific facts that well. The fact that I am a moderator does not say that I have to be able to talk scientific in a technological kind of way. I am not a moderator at the Science Forum, am I...

There is still no scientific proof what so ever about where human life really comes from.

As Adam says:

*Pansmperia was a joke to almost everyone only a few years ago. Now it is an accepted possibility.*

And it is only the beginning of discoveries to come which are NOW looked at as a joke.

I don't even go into your stupid quote by Mr G and your link you can keep. It is not opened by me.

As being members of Sciforums, you could show a little more respect for other members here, instead of always ridicule what they have to say.

Can't help thinking of you as being very narrow-minded. Try to behave as an 'intelligent' human, not as a caveman, where you probably got stuck. And you don't even see it yourself.

Goodbye for now. I'll be back if you can talk in a 'normal' way. If you are able to do so at all...

 

Banshee

Thank you for showing your appreciation. I can't help but think how it is you found malice within my posts. Especially after responding to the topic at hand with nary a snarl nor bite. I believe Mr. G was poking a little fun to which I responded. It was at your expense of course but you should understand there was no ill-will intended, right Mr. G?

So, chill out, dudette.

 

[Q],

I didn't have any problem with Banshee cut'n'pasting the article. It was properly attributed and was not presented as her own words. It was meant to intiate conversation not be conversation.

And, yes. I was poking fun at Banshee, at far more expense to her signature pet theories than to her person.

Banshee,

Respect is for people and their right to think and to say what they want. Expressed ideas are not automatically respectable. Respectable ideas are respectable.

Correct or incorrect, the scientific theory of Transpermia is an idea I can respect.

Aton's Pleiades fleet, talking planets, supernaturals, illusory non-corporeals, etc., etc., etc., are not ideas I can respect. They are based soley on anecdotal evidence which is of inconsequential value to me.

 

Mr. G

I didn't have any problem with Banshee cut'n'pasting the article. It was properly attributed and was not presented as her own words. It was meant to intiate conversation not be conversation.

Quite right. Thank you for pointing that out. I will therefore retract this portion from my post:

To simply cut, paste and run are not attributes worthy of a forum representative such as yourself.

 

Food for thought...

Perhaps there is a mind outside of time...

If we agree that life is the ultimate result of intelligent control and that the Universe(s) exhibit signs of intelligent design, then intelligence itself is some intrinsic part of the Universe(s). Continuous creation may also be part of the ongoing process. But what if all is mind?

Then what we perceive to be the evolution of objects may be the evolution of thought...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(just for the record [Q], my own words. Happy now??!!)

 

Banshee,

Thanks for the topic. I always believed that life on Earth came from the Cosmos. I never actually considered Panspermia. Never even thought of it. You got me thinking. I'm am actually amazed at the idea, right now.

Thanks

 

original sources of life

I read here all tht about meteorites bringing life and I have allways thought tht we were "infected" tht way, but from where it came??? There must be a source actually many surces of original life. So we can't say tht life on planets appears only frm metiorites and comets. So here we are back to the first question (maybe now on another planet

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

), how did life first appear?

and tht thing tht we can not create life from tht "primitive" soup-> people we are only at start of our evolution and you want to be gods already, a little patience and futher scientific progress needed.

 

This isn't a Theory that explains the origin of Life but it does explain the Universal Evolution of Life. It seems we will never know the answer to the Origin.

 

NEVER SAY NEVER

 

Answer to the Origin (I'm guessing the big O means something)?

It's not any big mystery, and it never has been. There's nothing spooky or mystical about it.

The elements required for life as we know it are everywhere. The molecules common to life as we know it are everywhere; on space rocks, in dust and gas clouds in space, on planets, all over. The conditions in which those molecules might develop into cells are incredibly common too.

Not big mystery. Life, to me, is just something that happens now and then in the universe. Probably quite common.

 

Elements being everywhere isn't the Mystery at all. The real Mystery questions are how did it all come to be? Was it always as it is now? Was there a beginning? Is there an end? HOW?????? Big Big? Create something from nothing????